I'm a programmer learning PHP. I'm looking for some input on its
strong and weak points compared to other server-side programming
environments, e.g., Java Server Pages.

Please note, this is not a religious question. Programming languages
are tools to me. I just want information about where different types
of solutions are likely to be optimal.

"Jonathan Sachs" <js070717@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
news:drdgr3h9bi2qfetppumbqjb8cpc0apji8q@4ax.com...
> I'm a programmer learning PHP. I'm looking for some input on its
> strong and weak points compared to other server-side programming
> environments, e.g., Java Server Pages.
>
> Please note, this is not a religious question. Programming languages
> are tools to me. I just want information about where different types
> of solutions are likely to be optimal.

Take your pick: PHP, ASP, ASP.NET, Perl, Python, Java, et.al.

What does your Web server support? What languages do you know?

The answer usually boils down to the above.

What Every Webmaster Should Know: PHP, Perl, ASP.net
http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/006709.html

McKirahan wrote:
> "Jonathan Sachs" <js070717@sbcglobal.net> wrote in message
> news:drdgr3h9bi2qfetppumbqjb8cpc0apji8q@4ax.com...
>> I'm a programmer learning PHP. I'm looking for some input on its
>> strong and weak points compared to other server-side programming
>> environments, e.g., Java Server Pages.
>>
>> Please note, this is not a religious question. Programming languages
>> are tools to me. I just want information about where different types
>> of solutions are likely to be optimal.
>
> Take your pick: PHP, ASP, ASP.NET, Perl, Python, Java, et.al.
>
> What does your Web server support? What languages do you know?
>
> The answer usually boils down to the above.
>
> What Every Webmaster Should Know: PHP, Perl, ASP.net
> http://www.seroundtable.com/archives/006709.html
>
>
And as usual, what fits your style and the application is better than
what is the Best Thing..


Coming from C I found PHP mainly good, but irritating because of weak
typing and inconsistency of syntax..this isn't a fault per se, just
something you have to be equally careful of as you do in wobbly if you
do operations on different types. In PHP they are invisibly converted
with sometimes unexpected results.

Its more than good enough for what I want tho..

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 07:38:50 -0600, Jonathan Sachs
<js070717@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>I'm a programmer learning PHP. I'm looking for some input on its
>strong and weak points compared to other server-side programming
>environments, e.g., Java Server Pages.

First, are you totally free to choose a language, or are there some
constraint somewhere that would narrow things down? For instance, if
you'll host your app on a shared server, just about every hoster
offers PHP, while other languages are much more rare.

If you'll be using your own server, you'll have to check if the app
has any dependency, in which case you'll have to check if those
externalities can be called from the language.

Finally, what language do you already know? In terms of productivity,
Python is probably the best, because it's very rich while offering a
very simple syntax, while PHP is much more common simply because it's
been offered by hosters for about ten years now.

The web is pretty restrictive in what you can do compared to desktop
apps anyway, because of the nature of HTTP and HTML, so ultimately,it
doesn't make much of a difference what language you choose on the
server. You can probably even write most of it in JavaScript and call
routines from the client through AJAX :-)

On Feb 17, 3:38 pm, Jonathan Sachs <js070...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I'm a programmer learning PHP. I'm looking for some input on its
> strong and weak points compared to other server-side programming
> environments, e.g., Java Server Pages.
>
> Please note, this is not a religious question. Programming languages
> are tools to me. I just want information about where different types
> of solutions are likely to be optimal.

As you asked for optimization, here is a list that i made, considering
investment & operational cost, and time saving features, etc. Ofcourse
i suggest open source, big companies like yahoo, google, nasa,
youtube, facebook,etc. use;

1-Python
2-PHP
3-Perl
4-Java

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:27:05 +0100, Gilles Ganault <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

>First, are you totally free to choose a language, or are there some
>constraint somewhere that would narrow things down?

Either/or. I'm not asking in the context of a particular project or
client. I'm looking for guidance on when to select this tool and when
to look for another.

Right now I'm learning PHP because I want to learn a particular
application that is written in it, and also because these days it
appears to be a basic development skill. I am trying to assess what
role it will play in my professional life.

>For instance, if
>you'll host your app on a shared server, just about every hoster
>offers PHP, while other languages are much more rare.

The hosting service I use offers ASP.NET even with its least expensive
e-commerce plan, at $13.95/month. I don't know how common that is,
but for me, it establishes that alternatives are readily available.

Of course, a particular client or its preferred hosting service could
limit me to PHP, which would determine my choice of language if I
wanted to keep that client.

>Finally, what language do you already know? In terms of productivity,
>Python is probably the best, because it's very rich while offering a
>very simple syntax, while PHP is much more common simply because it's
>been offered by hosters for about ten years now.

Well, let's see. My background is mainly in PC software development,
which influences the languages I know. Starting with the most recent,
C#, JavaScript, Java, C++, Visual Basic for Applications, C, FORTH,
BASIC, PL/1, SNOBOL3, BAL, FORTRAN IV. Plus a few minor ones that
I've forgotten.

>The web is pretty restrictive ... so ultimately, it
>doesn't make much of a difference what language you choose...

In a strictly technical sense that may be true, but many other
considerations come into play. You've mentioned a couple: support by
hosting services and compatibility with applications. I might also
have to consider maintainability, portability, and acceptance by
clients at various levels of technical sophistication.

Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
will be hitting the web site at the same time. I'm guessing, though,
and I wouldn't know how to judge how large is too large. Perhaps
there are other areas where PHP is particularly weak or strong, which
I do not yet know enough to wonder about. Hence, my question.

Jonathan Sachs wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:27:05 +0100, Gilles Ganault <nospam@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>> First, are you totally free to choose a language, or are there some
>> constraint somewhere that would narrow things down?
>
> Either/or. I'm not asking in the context of a particular project or
> client. I'm looking for guidance on when to select this tool and when
> to look for another.
>

Select the tool which meets your needs. Sometimes it's PHP, sometimes
Java, sometimes something else.

You an only make an intelligent selection when you are familiar with all
of the products you're choosing from yourself. Others cannot make that
decision for you.

> Right now I'm learning PHP because I want to learn a particular
> application that is written in it, and also because these days it
> appears to be a basic development skill. I am trying to assess what
> role it will play in my professional life.
>

Only you can determine that.

>> For instance, if
>> you'll host your app on a shared server, just about every hoster
>> offers PHP, while other languages are much more rare.
>
> The hosting service I use offers ASP.NET even with its least expensive
> e-commerce plan, at $13.95/month. I don't know how common that is,
> but for me, it establishes that alternatives are readily available.
>

Then become familiar with the rest of the market. Do some research.
You'll find, for instance, that while your hosting company offers
ASP.NET, their offer in fairly rare, and their price much above
equivalent hosting offers in other languages.

> Of course, a particular client or its preferred hosting service could
> limit me to PHP, which would determine my choice of language if I
> wanted to keep that client.
>

True, unless you can convince them to change. But you need to have good
reasons to do so, and a good relationship with your client.

>> Finally, what language do you already know? In terms of productivity,
>> Python is probably the best, because it's very rich while offering a
>> very simple syntax, while PHP is much more common simply because it's
>> been offered by hosters for about ten years now.
>
> Well, let's see. My background is mainly in PC software development,
> which influences the languages I know. Starting with the most recent,
> C#, JavaScript, Java, C++, Visual Basic for Applications, C, FORTH,
> BASIC, PL/1, SNOBOL3, BAL, FORTRAN IV. Plus a few minor ones that
> I've forgotten.
>
>> The web is pretty restrictive ... so ultimately, it
>> doesn't make much of a difference what language you choose...
>
> In a strictly technical sense that may be true, but many other
> considerations come into play. You've mentioned a couple: support by
> hosting services and compatibility with applications. I might also
> have to consider maintainability, portability, and acceptance by
> clients at various levels of technical sophistication.
>
> Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
> choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
> will be hitting the web site at the same time. I'm guessing, though,
> and I wouldn't know how to judge how large is too large. Perhaps
> there are other areas where PHP is particularly weak or strong, which
> I do not yet know enough to wonder about. Hence, my question.
>

Not at all. It works as well as any language and better than many.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:14:10 -0600, Jonathan Sachs
<js070717@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
>choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
>will be hitting the web site at the same time.

Based on what data? I'm interested, because I wonder why all those big
companies choose Java, which is so much more verbose and intricate
than Python, so I assume they have a reason for choosing that
language.

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:07:36 +0100, Gilles Ganault <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:14:10 -0600, Jonathan Sachs
><js070717@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
>>choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
>>will be hitting the web site at the same time.
>
>Based on what data? I'm interested, because I wonder why all those big
>companies choose Java, which is so much more verbose and intricate
>than Python, so I assume they have a reason for choosing that
>language.

I'll repeat that I'm guessing here. My guess is based on the fact
that PHP is (as far as I know) an interpreted language, while Java is
a JIT compiled language.

I'm aware that many servers can reduce overhead by page caching, but
that is a more limited strategy than compilation. There are
situations where it would be almost equally effective... others where
it would be almost useless.

The fact that Java and C# are strongly typed languages may also have
an effect on the scalability of applications, as well as their
robustness and maintainability.

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:23:34 GMT, Jonathan Sachs
<js070717@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>I'll repeat that I'm guessing here. My guess is based on the fact
>that PHP is (as far as I know) an interpreted language, while Java is
>a JIT compiled language.

Does someone have data on whether JIT-compiled Java is faster than
cached PHP opcode?

>The fact that Java and C# are strongly typed languages may also have
>an effect on the scalability of applications, as well as their
>robustness and maintainability.

That's a good reason.

Jonathan Sachs wrote:
>
>
> Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
> choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
> will be hitting the web site at the same time. I'm guessing, though,
> and I wouldn't know how to judge how large is too large. Perhaps
> there are other areas where PHP is particularly weak or strong, which
> I do not yet know enough to wonder about. Hence, my question.

The current trend eems to be to throw processor power and RAM at such sites.

If you have such, you probably would also have an Oracle Database
underneath, not MySql :-)

I picked PHP because I wanted fast prototyping of sonething running on a
cheap platform, for moderate traffic only.

Its actually pretty good. I am more bandwidth limited than processor
bound, and probably RAM would be the first thing I would add.

There is no doubt that writing in C would be immensely more efficient
than an interpreter, but then you have the usual compile/link/install to
do every time you make a change.

However there is no reason why you could not pretty much recode any time
critical bits into 'C'..r write a whole PHP library in 'C' that did your
clever bits.*

In the end execution efficiency is almost never a dominant issue..with
PHP, MYSQL and Apache, especially on a Linux OS, you have an ideal
platform that costs next to nothing to develop applications. A thousand
concurrent users hitting it would probably cripple it sure, but by then
you should have the money and the reason to migrate to something top
end, if that's what's needed.

I would regard the above as the de-facto standards for small to medium
website development.

*Where does one find out how to do this? I might need to one day...

Gilles Ganault wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:23:34 GMT, Jonathan Sachs
> <js070717@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>> I'll repeat that I'm guessing here. My guess is based on the fact
>> that PHP is (as far as I know) an interpreted language, while Java is
>> a JIT compiled language.
>
> Does someone have data on whether JIT-compiled Java is faster than
> cached PHP opcode?
>
>> The fact that Java and C# are strongly typed languages may also have
>> an effect on the scalability of applications, as well as their
>> robustness and maintainability.
>
> That's a good reason.
As is the difficulty of ripping off the source if for some reason the
3rd party server suddenly delivers pages of PHP source to you ;-)

It happens..

Jonathan Sachs wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:07:36 +0100, Gilles Ganault <nospam@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 09:14:10 -0600, Jonathan Sachs
>> <js070717@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>>> Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
>>> choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
>>> will be hitting the web site at the same time.
>> Based on what data? I'm interested, because I wonder why all those big
>> companies choose Java, which is so much more verbose and intricate
>> than Python, so I assume they have a reason for choosing that
>> language.
>
> I'll repeat that I'm guessing here. My guess is based on the fact
> that PHP is (as far as I know) an interpreted language, while Java is
> a JIT compiled language.
>
> I'm aware that many servers can reduce overhead by page caching, but
> that is a more limited strategy than compilation. There are
> situations where it would be almost equally effective... others where
> it would be almost useless.
>
> The fact that Java and C# are strongly typed languages may also have
> an effect on the scalability of applications, as well as their
> robustness and maintainability.
>

You will find that often java is slower than PHP.

Don't guess. Get the facts.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 14:16:25 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
<jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:

>You will find that often java is slower than PHP.
>
>Don't guess. Get the facts.

Can you refer me to a source of information on this, or at least
explain why it is so?

I value facts, but I do not have the ability to pull them out of thin
air. The value of USENET lies in the ability of like-minded people to
share information, so that each person does not have to reinvent or
rediscover the wheel for him or herself. Please share a little.

Jonathan Sachs wrote:
<snip>
>
> Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
> choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
> will be hitting the web site at the same time. I'm guessing, though,
> and I wouldn't know how to judge how large is too large. Perhaps
> there are other areas where PHP is particularly weak or strong, which
> I do not yet know enough to wonder about. Hence, my question.

I am not sure about the back-end, but at the front end, Facebook uses
Php and JS. Signing in takes you to the page below. Facebook's
popularity can be judged at Alexa.

http://www.facebook.com/home.php?

http://www.alexa.com/data/details/tr...s/facebook.com

Jonathan Sachs wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 14:16:25 -0500, Jerry Stuckle
> <jstucklex@attglobal.net> wrote:
>
>> You will find that often java is slower than PHP.
>>
>> Don't guess. Get the facts.
>
> Can you refer me to a source of information on this, or at least
> explain why it is so?
>
> I value facts, but I do not have the ability to pull them out of thin
> air. The value of USENET lies in the ability of like-minded people to
> share information, so that each person does not have to reinvent or
> rediscover the wheel for him or herself. Please share a little.
>

Because they are two different approaches to programming. Just because
java is precompiled doesn't necessarily make it faster. There are many
other things to take into consideration.

As I said - run your own tests.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:31:17 -0800, Animesh K <animesh1978@gmail.com>
wrote:
>I am not sure about the back-end, but at the front end, Facebook uses
>Php and JS. Signing in takes you to the page below. Facebook's
>popularity can be judged at Alexa.

BTW, if I include some JS libraries/components in each page, are they
cached by the browser so that it doesn't need to download those files
again the next time?

Gilles Ganault wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:31:17 -0800, Animesh K <animesh1978@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>> I am not sure about the back-end, but at the front end, Facebook uses
>> Php and JS. Signing in takes you to the page below. Facebook's
>> popularity can be judged at Alexa.
>
> BTW, if I include some JS libraries/components in each page, are they
> cached by the browser so that it doesn't need to download those files
> again the next time?
>

Maybe, maybe not. It depends on the browser, the options the user has
set, and even possible caching by ISP's between you and the client.

The only think you know for sure is it's something you have absolutely
no control over.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

Jerry Stuckle wrote:
> Gilles Ganault wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:31:17 -0800, Animesh K <animesh1978@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>> I am not sure about the back-end, but at the front end, Facebook uses
>>> Php and JS. Signing in takes you to the page below. Facebook's
>>> popularity can be judged at Alexa.
>>
>> BTW, if I include some JS libraries/components in each page, are they
>> cached by the browser so that it doesn't need to download those files
>> again the next time?
>>
>
> Maybe, maybe not. It depends on the browser, the options the user has
> set, and even possible caching by ISP's between you and the client.
>
> The only think you know for sure is it's something you have absolutely
> no control over.
>

Well your worst-case point of not knowing is valid, but for a large
fraction of users, caching (up to about 50MB or more) is enabled by
default. Most people use IE 6 or IE 7. Even those who move to firefox
don't go to advanced settings.

Animesh K wrote:
> Jerry Stuckle wrote:
>> Gilles Ganault wrote:
>>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 12:31:17 -0800, Animesh K <animesh1978@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>> I am not sure about the back-end, but at the front end, Facebook
>>>> uses Php and JS. Signing in takes you to the page below. Facebook's
>>>> popularity can be judged at Alexa.
>>>
>>> BTW, if I include some JS libraries/components in each page, are they
>>> cached by the browser so that it doesn't need to download those files
>>> again the next time?
>>>
>>
>> Maybe, maybe not. It depends on the browser, the options the user has
>> set, and even possible caching by ISP's between you and the client.
>>
>> The only think you know for sure is it's something you have absolutely
>> no control over.
>>
>
> Well your worst-case point of not knowing is valid, but for a large
> fraction of users, caching (up to about 50MB or more) is enabled by
> default. Most people use IE 6 or IE 7. Even those who move to firefox
> don't go to advanced settings.
>

Not necessarily. In fact, I've found most users are using 10MB caching
at max. Many are using less than that.

What you say may be valid for people who know absolutely nothing about
computers. But I've found users on many of my sites are relatively
intelligent. That doesn't mean they can write programs - but they can
fool around with their browser settings.

--
==================
Remove the "x" from my email address
Jerry Stuckle
JDS Computer Training Corp.
jstucklex@attglobal.net
==================

On Feb 17, 5:38 am, Jonathan Sachs <js070...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> I'm a programmer learning PHP. I'm looking for some input on its
> strong and weak points compared to other server-side programming
> environments, e.g., Java Server Pages.
>
> Please note, this is not a religious question. Programming languages
> are tools to me. I just want information about where different types
> of solutions are likely to be optimal.

Advantages:
- Open Source, readily available (you can be using it today) and dual-
licensed - if you are doing non-profit work or not licensing, there is
no cost.
- Very Easy to understand Syntax, some really cool features (arrays
are something else!)
- Interfaces very easily with Apache/MySQL
- Server side (no need to futz with client installs - only with
rendering issues if you use CSS).
- Lots of good source code out there to use and/or learn from, as well
as many useful libraries for working with PDFs, graphics, etc.
- Lots of good books and on-line (php.net is great)
- Platform agnostic, can run on Windows Linux or Mac servers. Also
very scalable.
- Lots of hosting services have it ready to use, no special
configuration (except if you have special security needs)
- Pretty easy to access other web-based tools through PHP (i.e. google
maps, etc.)

Disadvantages
- If you want to do more than just HTML/CSS pages on the client you
need to also add javascript, java or other client-side language in
your output (goes for Perl and some other languages).
- The way browsers work make handling data and coding programs more
interesting (technically each page is a new run on the system, so you
have to manage your variables coming in and going out and between
pages. Not hard, just different.)
- Web programming (regardless of language) is open to security flaws
due to unimplemented or unknown vulnerabilities, takes a bit more
caution.

On 17 Feb, 18:41, The Natural Philosopher <a...@b.c> wrote:
> Jonathan Sachs wrote:
>
> > Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
> > choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
> > will be hitting the web site at the same time. I'm guessing, though,
> > and I wouldn't know how to judge how large is too large. Perhaps
> > there are other areas where PHP is particularly weak or strong, which
> > I do not yet know enough to wonder about. Hence, my question.
>
> The current trend eems to be to throw processor power and RAM at such sites.
>

One of the most convincing arguments I've seen for PHP is the stats at
http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

Combined with the fact that PHP is generally considered a very easy
language to learn, it consistently scores very highly in number of
lines required to solve a problem (i.e. it doesn't need a lot). The
other languages which score well in this area are not well known for
their simplicity.

For 99.9% of applications, programmer time is more expensive than
hardware - so its more effective to solve performance problems by
throwing hardware at the problem (NB there is NO substitute for good
programming in keeping costs low and performance good though).

When I'm not programming in PHP I look after a large-ish Java site.
While on paper, the semi-compiled Java should be a lot faster, at
least here, there's no performance benefit.

> If you have such, you probably would also have an Oracle Database
> underneath, not MySql :-)
>

!

Not if performance is a concern. If I was starting from scratch
developing a large system with performance as a concern, Oracle would
be well down on my list behind MySQL and Sybase. (If you want to see
why go visit the vendors sites and compare performance). I'd also be
looking at Ants.

> There is no doubt that writing in C would be immensely more efficient
> than an interpreter, but then you have the usual compile/link/install to
> do every time you make a change.
>

Yes, I'd expect well crafted C (or even C++) to beat the socks off
PHP, but who has got that amount of time to spend writing functional,
secure code?

C.

On Feb 17, 5:14 pm, Jonathan Sachs <js070...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:27:05 +0100, Gilles Ganault <nos...@nospam.com>
> wrote:
>
> >First, are you totally free to choose a language, or are there some
> >constraint somewhere that would narrow things down?
>
> Either/or. I'm not asking in the context of a particular project or
> client. I'm looking for guidance on when to select this tool and when
> to look for another.
>
> Right now I'm learning PHP because I want to learn a particular
> application that is written in it, and also because these days it
> appears to be a basic development skill. I am trying to assess what
> role it will play in my professional life.
>
> >For instance, if
> >you'll host your app on a shared server, just about every hoster
> >offers PHP, while other languages are much more rare.
>
> The hosting service I use offers ASP.NET even with its least expensive
> e-commerce plan, at $13.95/month. I don't know how common that is,
> but for me, it establishes that alternatives are readily available.
>
> Of course, a particular client or its preferred hosting service could
> limit me to PHP, which would determine my choice of language if I
> wanted to keep that client.
>
> >Finally, what language do you already know? In terms of productivity,
> >Python is probably the best, because it's very rich while offering a
> >very simple syntax, while PHP is much more common simply because it's
> >been offered by hosters for about ten years now.
>
> Well, let's see. My background is mainly in PC software development,
> which influences the languages I know. Starting with the most recent,
> C#, JavaScript, Java, C++, Visual Basic for Applications, C, FORTH,
> BASIC, PL/1, SNOBOL3, BAL, FORTRAN IV. Plus a few minor ones that
> I've forgotten.
>
> >The web is pretty restrictive ... so ultimately, it
> >doesn't make much of a difference what language you choose...
>
> In a strictly technical sense that may be true, but many other
> considerations come into play. You've mentioned a couple: support by
> hosting services and compatibility with applications. I might also
> have to consider maintainability, portability, and acceptance by
> clients at various levels of technical sophistication.
>
> Speaking technically, it seems to me that PHP is likely to be a poor
> choice for large-scale services where hundreds or thousands of users
> will be hitting the web site at the same time. I'm guessing, though,
> and I wouldn't know how to judge how large is too large. Perhaps
> there are other areas where PHP is particularly weak or strong, which
> I do not yet know enough to wonder about. Hence, my question.

PHP is poor? YouTube and Facebook runs on PHP dude..

On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 01:46:19 -0800 (PST), "C.
(http://symcbean.blogspot.com/)" <colin.mckinnon@gmail.com> wrote:
>One of the most convincing arguments I've seen for PHP is the stats at
>http://shootout.alioth.debian.org/

So, in practise, what are the usual bottlenecks for PHP web apps?
Access to the DB? Hard-disk? CPU? Network?

> I'd also be looking at Ants.

You mean www.ants.com ?

>Yes, I'd expect well crafted C (or even C++) to beat the socks off
>PHP, but who has got that amount of time to spend writing functional,
>secure code?

Besides, it'd be stupid to write very fast C code... but have the CPU
spend 99% of its time idle, waiting for bytes to travel in and out of
the network :-)

On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 22:01:12 -0800 (PST), larry@portcommodore.com
wrote:
>- If you want to do more than just HTML/CSS pages on the client you
>need to also add javascript, java or other client-side language in
>your output (goes for Perl and some other languages).

Isn't that true for all server-side languages? The OP asked how PHP
compared to other languages used to build web apps, not PHP vs.
desktop languages.